Monday, October 3, 2016

Variance between allegation and proof

Read - 
G.R. No. 194390, August 13, 2014, VENANCIO M. SEVILLA, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.




"x x x.

“xxx. The rules on variance between allegation and proof are laid down under Sections 4 and 5, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court, viz:

Sec. 4. Judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof. – When there is variance between the offense charged in the complaint or information and that proved, and the offense as charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved.

Sec. 5. When an offense includes or is included in another. – An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information, constitute the latter. And an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of those constituting the latter.

Accordingly, in case of variance between the allegation and proof, a defendant may be convicted of the offense proved when the offense charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved.

There is no dispute that a variance exists between the offense alleged against Sevilla and that proved by the prosecution – the Information charged him with the intentional felony of falsification of public document under Article 171(4) of the RPC while the prosecution was able to prove reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public documents. Parenthetically, the question that has to be resolved then is whether reckless imprudence resulting to falsification of public document is necessarily included in the intentional felony of falsification of public document under Article 171(4) of the RPC.”

x x x."